4.4 Article

Evaluation of a group intervention for children with food allergy and their parents

Journal

ANNALS OF ALLERGY ASTHMA & IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 101, Issue 2, Pages 160-165

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)60204-9

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Jaffe Family Foundation
  2. Children's Hospital League

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Children with food allergy and their parents may experience substantial stress related to the risk of serious reactions and the demands of allergy management. Objective: To evaluate a group intervention for children with food allergy and their parents designed to increase parent-perceived competence in coping with food allergy and to decrease the parent-perceived burden associated with food allergy. Methods: Sixty-one children aged 5 to 7 years with food allergy and their parents attended I of 4 half-day workshops, with parent and child groups run concurrently. Parents completed self-report measures of perceived competence in coping with food allergy at 3 time points: preworkshop (within 8 weeks of the intervention), postworkshop (immediately after the intervention), and follow-up (4-8 weeks after the intervention). Parents completed a measure of burden associated with food allergy at preworkshop and follow-up. Parents and children also completed evaluations of the study intervention. Results: Parent-perceived competence in coping with food allergy increased significantly from preworkshop to postworkshop and follow-up, and parent-perceived burden associated with food allergy decreased from preworkshop to follow-up. Parent and child evaluations of the workshop were favorable. Conclusions: These findings provide preliminary support for the effectiveness and feasibility of a group intervention for children with food allergy and their parents and suggest the importance of controlled evaluations of group interventions in this population in the future.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available